As the UK’s departure from the European Union rapidly approaches the chances of ‘no deal’ Brexit appear to be rising.

This once unthinkable outcome would see us crash out of Europe on March 29, 2019 without a deal in place – the hardest possible Brexit in other words.

European leaders’ rejection of Prime Minister Theresa May’s ‘Chequers plan’ – a political fudge which had already been given short shrift by both Tory Brexiteers and the Labour Party – makes a mutually acceptable compromise appear further away than ever.

“Not a problem,” say the Brexiteers. A hard Brexit, they insist, will hurt the EU far more than it will hurt us and Britain will thrive come what may. Once we leave we’ll be free to abolish all tariffs, slash regulations and cut taxes, allowing the UK to become the most business-friendly country in the world.

And they would probably expect such an approach to be supported by voters in places such as Stoke-on-Trent, which voted overwhelmingly in favour of leaving the EU in 2016.

Read More

But is a no-deal Brexit actually what 70 per cent of people here voted for in the referendum? And would a no-deal Brexit benefit Stoke-on-Trent?

I think the answers to these questions are ‘probably not’ and ‘absolutely not’.

There are numerous reasons why so many Stokies voted for Brexit two years ago – such as concerns over immigration (despite inward migration being relatively low here), a dislike of EU red tape and its lack of democracy, and a desire for the UK to have more say over its own affairs.

EU leaders have rejected Theresa May's Chequers plan

But I think the main issue behind Stoke-on-Trent’s Brexit vote was a general feeling that the Potteries had been left behind by 40 years of neoliberal economic policy – a cosy consensus that was embodied by both the EU itself and its strongest cheerleaders, such as David Cameron and Tony Blair.

And you only have to look at Stoke-on-Trent’s derelict pottery factories, pot-hole filled roads and depleted public services to see that such a feeling was justified. While Stoke-on-Trent clearly isn’t the hopeless, post-industrial wasteland that it is so often portrayed as in condescending national media reports, the city has not enjoyed the same benefits of neoliberalism as places such as London.

Read More

With that in mind, I fail to see how the hyper-charged neoliberalism being proposed by hard Brexiteers would help Stoke-on-Trent.

The city’s resurgent ceramic industry needs protection from unfair competition from countries like China – protection which is currently provided by the EU. Only this week, the British Ceramic Confederation raised concerns that the worsening trade war between China and America could increase the threat of Chinese dumping.

How then would Stoke-on-Trent’s manufacturers cope if Britain was cast adrift on the high seas without any defences against hurricane-strength economic headwinds?

A no-deal Brexit could also mean even more austerity, as Britain moves to lower taxes and lower public spending in order to become more competitive. That would mean less public money to spend on places like Stoke-on-Trent, which has already been hit hard by eight years of austerity. The promise of a Brexit dividend of £350 million a week for the NHS would become a distant memory.

It’s easy for Brexiteers such as Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg to claim that a no-deal Brexit is nothing to be afraid of – their personal wealth would insulate them against any economic hardships. But do you think these politicians really know, or even care, how the hard Brexit policy they espouse would hit real people in Stoke-on-Trent? Do you really think they have our best interests at heart?

Stoke-on-Trent voted for Brexit, as did the country as a whole, and that is what must be delivered. But nobody in Stoke-on-Trent voted for more economic hardship. Mrs May must ensure that does not happen and that means reaching a compromise with the EU – no deal would be the worst possible deal for Stoke-on-Trent.